Vijay Singh's motion for records on drug use by other PGA Tour players denied

Judge limits scope to players who took same substance as Singh

New York Supreme Court judge Eileen Bransten has denied Vijay Singh’s request for PGA Tour files on players who have tested positive for banned substances other than IGF-1, which Singh admitted ingesting through a substance called Deer Antler Spray.

The decision was filed with the New York Supreme Court and New York County clerk on June 19.

Singh, a Ponte Vedra Beach resident and member of the World Golf Hall of Fame, sued the PGA Tour last year for its handling of the investigation into his use of Deer Antler Spray, which contained IGF-1 a growth hormone on the list of banned substances. Singh admitted to using the product in an interview with Sports Illustrated in January of 2013 and was suspended.

Singh was allowed to play while he appealed but before the appeal was heard, the World Anti-Doping Association took Deer Antler Spray off its banned list because tests showed that only trace amounts could get into a person’s system. Since the Tour goes by WADA’s banned list, Singh’s suspension was lifted on April 30.

He sued the Tour a week later on the day before the first round of The Players Championship, claiming damages to his reputation and negligence on the Tour’s part during the investigation.

Singh’s attorneys requested records in December of 2013 on the possible use of banned substances by Tour players Mark Calcavecchia, Scott Verplank, Matt Every, Doug Barron and Dustin Johnson. Singh’s lead attorney, Peter Ginsburg, claimed that the information would show that the Tour treated other players accused of violating its anti-doping policy more leniently than Singh.

The Tour claimed any information involving those players had nothing to do with Singh’s case and were “overreaching.”

Bransten agreed, writing in the decision that the request was “outside the scope of the plaintiff’s allegations.”

“It [Singh’s request] includes documents related to violations for the use or suspected use of substances other than Deer Antler Spray or IGF-1, and is therefore not material and necessary.”

Bransten said that the motion to compel “should be limited in scope ... related to these golfers’ alleged use, attempted use or use of IGF-1 or any product containing IGF-1.”